This is an archive of inactive discussion. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

You've put a lot of effort into Current computer and video games events. This barnstar is in recognition of that, as well as your efforts to improve WikiProject CVG in general. Congratulations, and keep up the good work! --Pagrashtak 05:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the barnstar! Maybe we should create a CVG barnstar, there are a lot of people who really deserve one. Cheers! Jacoplane 05:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

No problem, you've done a lot of great work. It's funny, I was just thinking that we need a CVG barnstar. We've already got the controller image, we just need someone to smack it in front of a star. --Pagrashtak 05:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about this: Image:BarnstarCVG.png? Jacoplane 06:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not bad at all! --Pagrashtak 07:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Im thinking about applying for adminship, do you think its a good idea? Or should i hold off for now till i build up my street cred some more. --Larsinio 22:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sweet barnstar! It was a nice surprise. Thunderbrand 01:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've managed to implement most of the (useful) suggestions from the peer review into Table of political parties in Europe by pancontinental organisation. If you were still keen on featured list status, I certainly wouldn't object :) The Tom 05:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't discovered featured article review for quite some time following the nomination at WP:FARC. However, for future reference, you are right. I will place it for review first. Thank you. —Eternal Equinox | talk 02:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jacoplane- If that was TheRingess you just tried to unblock again, it showed up in #wikipedia-en-vandalism as [[User:#99879]] for some reason, that may have something to do with all this. --Rory096 04:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, That "user" was weird. And thanks for the revert.Mikereichold 09:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For blocking User:195.85.154.162 ... they were fast. Adrian~enwiki (talk) 11:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can yopu please explain how what I did was nonsense? 198.96.86.4 13:30, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know which edit. But I thought I would put it as a subsection under club career section where the table would be relevent. If you see the edit history, you would see thats where I put it. 198.96.86.4 13:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Will use edit summary then. 198.96.86.4 13:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've vaguely heard of it. I don't think theres really much there to keep especially since it sounds like it isn't complete. I don't know. Rather merge with GoldenEye 007 (see bottom of section: Sequels) where it's already mentioned. K1Bond007 06:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jacoplane if you are an administrator, will you aid me in starting a team of fellow Wikipedians? Please sent me some information on being an administrator (because I believe I would be perfect for the job)!, A.S.A.P --Metallifan 13:16, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi Jacoplane/archive4. On behalf of my right eye, I'd like to thank you for giving me your support on my recent RfA. It ended with a final tally of (73/2/2) and therefore I have been installed as an administrator now, and I'm ready to serve Wikipedians all over the world with my newly acquired mop and bucket. If you have any questions, do not hestitate to forward them to my talkpage. Once again, thanks for your support. SoothingR 20:57, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was just wondering if you would like to sign this petition. It's a petition for getting the original voice actors back for the Sonic games (instead of the Sonic X voice actors). --anon

The removal was a mistake. :( — Kimchi.sg | Talk 08:43, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please note that all images should have detailed source information. In is insufficient to tag them as promotional without a specific (i.e. URL) source. Images without this information will be deleted. If you reinstate the images you mention, could you also update the image description pages with an accurate source. Thanks The JPS 12:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Nn_romney.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 17:26, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting me in my successful RFA. The admin tools will definitely be useful for dealing with vandalism more swiftly. Please drop a note on my talk page, should you have questions about any of my actions. --Aude (talk | contribs) 01:16, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Can you help - the Playstaion 3 talk page is getting very long but I can't find out how to archive it. Maybe you could and perhaps leave a link for me so that I can do it in the future if I need to. (The page is now much longer than any of the previous archives) Also most of the topics on the page seem have been resolved - except a discussion between User:Seraphim and User:Daniel.Cardenas heading "Being Stooges for Sony Marketing Department" which seems to be getting a little heated. Maybe a new page would help both of these users to cool off and consider the value of their discussion, or maybe not. Quote from this discussion:"i think you need to look inside at yourself and re-evaluate if you should be editing future-release articles" - if that was me I'd consider it insulting - I'm sure its all harmless fun but..

Anyway - how do I archive talk pages? (are there wiki guidlines?) Thank youHappyVR 20:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody helped me do the above, Thanks anyway, you can now ignore this message.HappyVR 16:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With apologies for the impersonal AWB-ness of the message... Thanks for your support on my recent request for adminship. It passed at 91/1/0, and I hope I can continue to deserve the community's trust. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help you, and if I make a mistake be sure to tell me. My talk page is always open. (ESkog)^(Talk) 02:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you vote for my GCOTW collab? Michael Jackson's Moonwalker? Thanks!! --Larsinio 17:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beste allemaal Al enige tijd is er een Nederlandstalig chapter in oprichting, te vinden op http://nl.wikimedia.org . Dit wordt de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland (VWN). Je kunt je interesse om lid te worden van deze vereniging hier aangeven.

Deze vereniging gaat eind augustus/begin september een Wikimedia Conferentie in Nederland (WCN) houden, volgend op Wikimania in Boston, gedeeltelijk erop inspelend middels een aantal discussiegroepen. Om iets dergelijks te organiseren is imput erg gewenst. Dus als je wilt meehelpen, of als je interesse hebt om bij een dergelijk evenement aanwezig te zijn, geef dat dan aan op nl.wikimedia. Ik hoop daar snel je imput tegemoet te zien! Met vriendelijke groet, effeietsanders 15:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say thank you for voting for my RFA, of course if you ever need a hand, let me know :) Also, I think your sig is the nicest looking one I have seen around :) - cohesion★talk 23:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have taken an interest in links. Please be kind enough to vote for my new bot application to reduce overlinking of dates where they are not part of date preferences. bobblewik 23:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I'll check it out when I get a chance. User:Zoe|^(talk) 00:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating. Never knew about that, but I voted. How is it supposed to work? If enough people vote for it, do they collaborate to research and improve the article? I see that a minimum of 3 votes a week is necessary.

Thank you for supporting my successful Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Raven4x4x request for adminship. I'll try to put the admin tools to good and responsible use. If I do anything wrong you know where to find me. Raven4x4x 07:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry about that

Hi, I have copied the archive of January to 2006 in video gaming and have encouraged others to continue with February. This is consistent with what has been done in previous years. I also moved the month pages to a new name, consistent with the year ones; I hope I haven't broken any templates by doing that... --Azertus 16:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote for my gcotw candidate which is Computer and video game culture Thanks! --Larsinio 19:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thorpe | talk 20:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to upload a new version your image but someone used a different filename. --Thorpe | talk 23:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you can create one for your user page if you like at http://www.cooltext.com. --Thorpe | talk 19:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, just speedy it as an orphaned fair use image. Pagrashtak 22:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, my first involvement in Wikipedia has resulted with dispute and I'm afraid that StarForce needs more of your attention…

Salute, --Lovelight

Hola, Jackoplane & thank you for such kind reply, unfortunately, I'm also rather busy, currently I'm in the middle of Mark Ecko's Getting UP review (nice game, check it out if you will, it is quite artsy), and this StarForce issue is just in the way, should have already been behind me by now, but I tend to see things through and I have to admit that it all sparked a little passion… forcing me to be far more subjective than I intended. It's just that everyone involved seems to say same thing, and most people agree that all SF games are playable, so I really wonder why this cannot be stated in main article (actually I do understand why this information is constantly hushed up, and I simply felt a need to post a few shouts, perhaps someone who has a really good reason for playing illegal games will here the words and have nicer life;). I guess that all this has something to do with my tendency to see these things in somewhat metaphysical levels, if you know what I mean. For a while I even thought about translating article about SF that I wrote for PCPlay magazine, and ask my editor for permission to post it on Wiki, but no time for such action, and I don’t think that I could translate everything in a manner that would satisfy me as an author. Anyway, just dropped by to thank you, and tell you that I'll try to stay involved. I've already quick scanned interesting link you provided (thank you for invitation), but, sadly, at the moment I have to freeze my Wiki activities. Guess will meet again in a few days, first I have to meet my deadlines;). BTW, I work for # of IT magazines and games are just a part of my interest, few months ago I wrote huge article about online encyclopedias, with special care for all Wiki projects, so in a way, I'm already heavily involved in Wikipedia, or at least in the promotion of its lovely idea. Salute, --Lovelight

Would you be at all interested if I were to nominate you? jacoplane 02:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it sounds cheesy but I'm honored. Yes, I am interested; I've started becoming more active in WP:AFD and WP:TFD recently as well as marking images for speedy deletion, so I feel like I'm taking on more of a janitorial role. Any advice before I'm subjected to the gauntlet? Pagrashtak 03:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you plan to nominate me? Pagrashtak 00:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user thinks it is ironic that thanks for supporting Cyde's successful RFA came in the form of a userbox.

Here's a userbox for you. --Cyde Weys 04:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Cvgportal.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 21:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jacoplane/archive4, how is it going? Thank you for supporting my Request for adminship! It passed with a final vote of 73/1/1, which means that I have been granted adminship! I look forward to using these tools to enhance and maintain this wonderful site. I will continue regular article/project contributions, but I will also allocate a sizable portion of my wikischedule toward administrative duties :) Thanks again, and if you have any questions/comments/tips, please let me know! — Deckiller 04:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent vote on my RFA. While the nomination failed, I was rather expecting it due to the big lapse between registration and recent edits. I appreciate the comments you left when you voted, and I will definitely keep them in mind. If you have any other suggestions as to how I could improve as a Wikipedian, so as to hopefully succeed next time, please let me know! Thanks! —akghetto ^talk 07:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot for personally vouching for me in my RFA, I am very pessimistic about it passing, although one never knows about these things. It meant alot the things that you say since frankly I really dont get any wikipreciation, besides I guess from my own personal enjoyment of doing it and the optimism in collaborations shown by some users (particularly User:Vic_Vipr). But I should have just done more in policy, like you had said. Oh well :/ Thanks anyway --Larsinio 18:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you recently removed an image from a current article. Please explain in more details why you believe fair use does not apply. I have re-read the fair-use articles and here is what is what i believe qualifies the picture for fair use.

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

It is a valid point to display an image to cite a criticism.

the nature of the copyrighted work;

The only copyright on [the original] page is for the forum sofware at the bottom, so the posts themselves may not even be copyrighted.

the amount and substantially of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

refer to previous, and the screenshot is 2 posts out of 76.

the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

in any case, the forum contents cannot be sold/marketed so there is none.

Thankyou Fosnez 18:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I have placed this discussion in the talk page for the article, please discuss there. Fosnez 18:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info; I hope we somehow manage to turn him around. Hey, crazier things have happened on wiki...Deckiller 03:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider reverting edits that change "focused" to "focussed" (ie. spelling errors) and introduce grammatical mistakes an edit war. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 06:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. My rationale was that since he insistently reverted to his favoured version that contained glaring grammatical and spelling mistakes, he is not editing the article to improve it, but trying to disrupt it instead. At the very least, he is just reverting any-how anything that he doesn't like. I have requested for CheckUser but there is a huge backlog on Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser. The vast amount of new accounts with only edit on that page is worrying, and is it really a coincidence that all of them are reverting to his favoured version? Not to mention a string of vandalism that my user and talk page received during that time. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's beyond reasonable to assume that all the follow-up first-time and near first-time editors, as well as two new accounts which vandalised my user page, and four new accounts that vandalised my talk page are all sockpuppets of User:Robust Physique. If he pulls something like that off again, I'm going to block him. Even his malicious use of sockpuppets alone should get him a day or two. Tell me if you object. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made some changes to the Future section in the article and put up a detailed rationale for it in the talk page. Please review the edit and please comment on it. Also see the Alizee career over? discussion in the same talk page. In particluar, I want to draw admin attention to the user Frits van Houten, going through the discussions in the talk page of the article Alizée should make it clear why. --Soumyasch 18:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Ya, I think the person meant to put it on the AfD page. I've never seen someone get so excited about math though ;-) -- pm_shef 02:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added you as a friend on digg so I can see what you been diggin' lately. :) --Thorpe | talk 13:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How did you get ScummVM to output such a smooth-looking screenshot? NeoThe1 10:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshot from "The Dig." I already figured out the video filters, though. Thanks anyway! -NeoThe1 01:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your "Islamophobia definition" link really does give me cause for great concern.... I'm thinking of submitting it for AfD for that reason alone. Thoughts? Netscott 01:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Message received, is there any way to bring more editors to bear on this article to ensure a proper sum total NPOV since this article appears to be in such a precarious state relative to WP:NOR? Netscott 02:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it as to be done! It's called owning! They know they are doing the wrong thing, because they want to vandal. So I notice, and if they think they are a smart @ss...they get a lil piece of me:P
It's the way my game works:P

>x<ino 03:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ow. Just ow. I know that may be the new ref style or whatever, but it's horrid. First of all I don't like it because it places all the referencing text in the article space, making it an absolute mess to read in the edit window. Second it took 43 nicely alphabetized references and expanded them out to 63 unalphabetized references, many of them duplicated (as some sources are cited multiple times). I'm sorry to revert you on that, but I really think it was much nicer the way it was, and I'd ask you to not do that again on that article. Thanks. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 04:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Its been a long time since the peer review went into inactivity. The article has undergone some changes since the last comment. Please review the article in its current state. Thanks. Have a nice day.

--Soumyasch 08:27, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend, it seems that 66.210.134.5 has wrote nonsense again. This time, he (or she or it) has wrote some rubbish in the section "Trivia" about Bono (from U2) I am only a newbie, can you revert to last good version of the article? is it posible to block the changes of this person? last time he (or she or it) spoils the article was yesterday!!!

Check out doom127's userpage. He just sent me an email saying that the harassment he suffered on Wikipedia has annoyed him to the extent of abandoning his account. I was trying to get you guys to agree on this, and no, there WASN'T a consensus, despite what you and a few others are now doing. He was a good user, with a lot of good edits on Wikipedia. Sigh... I guess what they say is true- Wikipedia IS a foundation of groupthink. The Eye 02:25, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this is my fault how? The edit he was inserting in the Wikiproject clearly went against the Fair use policy. He was the one not being civil (are you saying I harassed him please show me where I did so) and he started revert warring. It's not at all a matter of group think, I just don't buy that accusation. I was fine with your latest revision. jacoplane 02:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit of a grey area. When the only subject of the image is the box, as in the image you linked to, it would be considered a derivative work, and therefore covered by the original copyright. Whereas a photo of a large shelf-full of video games would probably be okay, as the framing of the shot would be a significant original input. ed g2s • talk 12:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the name says it all the southerner 13:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know I completely understand why you made that statement... Edits by both Raphael1 and Irishpunktom tend to suffer greatly from logical inconsistencies and in many cases are tantamount to obfuscation to merely tire those out who do try to attain true NPOV in a given article. I'm glad to see that you are back on it but I fear that you too may eventually tire out battling such illogical (and often times heavily POV) edits. Netscott 18:49, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:) Yeah well we'll see how long I'll last. I really hope I can keep a cool head and help people reach some sort of consensus. Although this article is tiring, I don't really have much time left to do things on WP I actually enjoy doing.. jacoplane 18:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you added a few details about StarCraft 64 to the StarCraft page. Have you played the game? If it has any extra missions, could you make a note of them there? (No need to go into detail, though.) Kimera757 20:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saw on Reader2 you have Of Mice and Men on your new books list. I am currently studying about lonelyness and how Steinbeck reveals to us clues about what is going to happen next. Have an exam in school soon to do on it. Are you studying it or just reading it for pleasure? --Thorpe | talk 10:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just read it again recently, and it is one of my favorite books, so that would be for pleasure :) jacoplane 10:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you protect my userpage? User:Doom127 are vandalizing it. --Rick Browser 19:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you were revealed as a sockpuppet via your actions and your words. I've watched the entire dispute, and what was put on your page (a sockpuppet notice) is entirely appropriate, Rick. The Eye 22:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have not followed this dispute, and there seemed to be simply a template on his userpage without any evidence presented as I mentioned on the talk page. I think that if people make accusations there needs to be evidence to back up their claims, and simply saying "look at his contributions" is not evidence in my mind. jacoplane 03:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jacoplane Thanks very much for the welcome! I'm a longtime Wikipedia user and sometime contributor, but not since the registration requirement was introduced. I replaced the LBA 3 article for two reasons: articles on forthcoming computer games are commonplace, as long as the disclaimer is included (Half-Life 2: Episode One) and also LBA 3 isn't original work - comments from Frédérick Raynal are available (original), as are sketches (original) and reports and commentary (secondary) from fansites, such as http://el-muerte.student.utwente.nl/lba/ . Sure, it ain't Pulitzer material, but I think that LBA 3 has every bit as much of a right as, eg, HL2:Ep1 to a page on the Wikipedia. And after all, it's an encyclopedia - and someone may wish to get information on a possible sequel to LBA 2. Hope I've convinced you! T.

I've written up a detailed summary regarding Brazil4Linux, Rick Browser, his actions and the ESRB dispute in an attempt to ascertain directly whether or not he is a sockpuppet of Brazil4Linux, and put it on the CheckUser Request page [here].

Obviously that evidence stands out, but Rick's edits (which mostly center around Brazil topics), his style of speech, his first interjections into the ESRB topic (which was for him to put a grevious insult against me), the fact that he's been watching my user contributions just like Brazil4Linux has done all stand to mind.

Once the Checkuser comes back and shows that Rick does indeed hail from Brazil, I have no doubt that he will once again vanish and wait another few weeks, then create yet ANOTHER sockpuppet to attack me.

Listen, Jacoplane, I understand that you are attempting to be fair in this dispute. However, this user has been doing this (create sockpuppet, attack, disappear) for the better part of half a year now, and I quite frankly am sick of it. The fact that he was able to somehow discover the name of my wife (a fact that is nowhere on wikipedia and is not public) and then made derogatory harassment-oriented sockpuppets with her name in the title should be enough. I lost over an hours worth of work because this individual discovered my instant messenger account and "bombed" it while I was doing some VB work, crashing my PC.

The truth always comes out in the end, sir. Sincerely, Daniel Davis 06:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jacoplane...

Further revelations have been forthcoming- even as I was compiling the list of B4L IPs for the Rick Browser checkuser, he placed a personal attack on the "Request for Admin" page of user Jedi6, someone whom with the Rick Browser username has had NO prior contact with- in fact, the only person who has ever to my knowledge bore a grudge against Jedi6 was in fact Brazil4Linux. You can take a look at it [here].

He's disrupting what should be a very serious and solemn vote on Wikipedia, and I'm requesting your help in resolving it... What is normally done when someone leaps into an RFA with personal attacks? Daniel Davis 06:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's him. Daniel Davis 07:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jacoplane. Chances are that he'll just create another sock sometime in the future, but for the moment... there is peace. -bows- Good night. Daniel Davis 07:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]